Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

6 Blackf. 403

Fuller v. Wilson

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1843

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1843-05-15

<p>Evidence.—Replevin for a horse. Plea, property in a third person. Held, that the declarations of such third person that he had sold the horse to the plaintiff, and had no claim to him, were not admissible evidence for the plaintiff, (a)</p> <p>Practice.—The refusal of an instruction to the jury (the record not showing that the instruction was applicable to the case), will be presumed to be correct.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1843-05-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently October 1924

3 state decisions

10184318501860187018801890190019101920decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Dewey, J.

¶1Replevin for a horse. Pleas, 1, Property in one John M. Fuller; 2, Property in Brown, one of the defendants. Replications, property in the plaintiff, and issues. Verdict and judgment for the defendants.

¶2On the trial, the plaintiff offered in evidence the declarations of John 31. Fuller, the person named in the first plea, that he had sold the horse to the plaintiff, and did not claim to be the owner of it. The evidence was objected to and excluded.

¶3We think the rejection of the evidence was right. The plea, that John 3£. Fuller was the owner of the property in dispute did not make him a party to the record. He was a competent witness for the plaintiff; his declarations were hearsay, and not admissible evidence.

¶4There was an instruction to the jury asked for by the plaintiff and refused. As none of the evidence is spread upon the record, we have no means of knowing whether the instruction was pertinent to the facts of the case or not, and must, therefore, presume it to have been correctly refused. This is a point which we have frequently decided.

¶5Fer Curiam,.—The judgment is affirmed with costs.

/6/blackf/403 · .json · Public domain